O
Opticreep
I heard that you only see a significant performance increase in a
256MB Radeon card over a 128MB Radeon card when playing games at high
resolutions. On resolutions 1024X768 or lower, the performance is
virtually identical. I suppose the 256MB version would help on games
using obscenely high texture levels. But AFAIK, there are hardly any
games that take advantage of that... and even if they did, it would be
hard for a casual PC gamer to notice the "extra super quality
textures" without pausing the game, taking a screen shot, zoom in, and
using a magnifying glass.
Would these assumptions be correct?
Would an ATI Radeon 9800 Pro (128MB version) therefore give me a good
bang for the buck? I have no intention of ever playing games at any
resolution higher than 1024X768. The 256MB version would just be a
waste of money for me, then? I'm leaning towards the 128MB version,
unless someone tells me that 256MB video cards are going to be the
norm in the PC gaming industry within the next two years.
256MB Radeon card over a 128MB Radeon card when playing games at high
resolutions. On resolutions 1024X768 or lower, the performance is
virtually identical. I suppose the 256MB version would help on games
using obscenely high texture levels. But AFAIK, there are hardly any
games that take advantage of that... and even if they did, it would be
hard for a casual PC gamer to notice the "extra super quality
textures" without pausing the game, taking a screen shot, zoom in, and
using a magnifying glass.
Would these assumptions be correct?
Would an ATI Radeon 9800 Pro (128MB version) therefore give me a good
bang for the buck? I have no intention of ever playing games at any
resolution higher than 1024X768. The 256MB version would just be a
waste of money for me, then? I'm leaning towards the 128MB version,
unless someone tells me that 256MB video cards are going to be the
norm in the PC gaming industry within the next two years.